The Fossil Dating Paradox
Created on: September 4th, 2006
This is really how scientists date fossils. They take a fossil and use an unreliable method called carbon dating (look up the unstable structure of carbon-14) and get a number from the fossil. They take that number and base it off of what is known as the
None ( ._.)
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (1.52) | 94 | 1 | 71 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2,445 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 51 | https://www.bing.com |
| 9 | https://www.google.com/ |
| 7 | http://216.18.188.175:80 |
| 5 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 4 | http://ytmnsfw.com/users/adamadam |
1. Spelling errors bring down the message in the first place.
2. Carbon-14 dating is based on the ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 in the organism, not an outside geological column.
3. The book of Genesis was largely written in the poetic language of worship and prayer, not as a scientific record. It is more concerned with WHY we got here than HOW we got here.
4. I'm worried with your obsession about disproving evolution. Your faith goes much deeper than scientific theory, I'm sure. So I don't know why you think the masses will suddenly believe in God if you somehow manage to disprove it. God is supernatural, so thinking about God and verifying his existence requires thought that doesn't dwell on earthly science and sensory perception, but rather thought that goes beyond nature and into the extrasensory.
Pst...YOU DON'T USE A GEOLOGIC COLUMN ON A MATHMATICAL HALF LIFE PROBLEM. Go get your *ss some data on the carbon-14 levels in some fossils and run the numbers your damn self. Now you're insulting our intellegence with this sophomoric tripe. If anything, the geologic fossil records are the one solid piece of evidence that you can't say God put there. Since you have no argument, it's a 1
Wrong wrong wrong. The layers are dated using radiometric dating. You search for a material that retains a parent nuclide, but selectively rejects the daughter nuclides. For instance, while the material Zircon is forming, it retains Uranium and Thorium, and rejects Lead, one of the products of the uranium decay chain. By examining Zircon regions in rock, and measuring the Uranium-Lead ratio, you can tell how old a rock is.
You're correct that carbon dating is unreliable for fossils older than around 50,000 years old. However, carbon dating is NOT used for fossils believed to be millions of years old. Look up potassium-argon dating, for an example of something that is actually used. The dating is not circular at all - they find the date of volcanic rocks in a layer of soil through something like potassium-argon dating and then that determines the date of every fossil found in the same layer.
I refer you to http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html . Leaving aside the NUMBERS of millions of years old any particular fossil group might be, clearly the fossil record itself is not seriously disputable. And notice that this area of science was developing quite nicely before evolution was even proposed by Darwin, let alone accepted by the scientific community.
"From the 1830s onwards, geologists noted how fossils became more complex through time. The oldest rocks contained no fossils, then came simple sea creatures, then more complex ones like fishes, then came life on land, then reptiles, then mammals, and finally humans. Clearly, there was some kind of 'progress' going on."
Take some basic geology classes. One of the first things they teach is that they use Carbon and Uranium isotopes (and a wide assortment of other isotopes) to test for ages. Since we know what the half lives of those isotopes are, we can figure out how old a rock unit is by determining the amount of that isotope left.
Bet you didn't expect geology majors to use this site, did you?
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWW
Carbon dating is incredibly reliable dipsh*t. Jesus freaks claim it isn't because they have their heads up their asses and can't belive the Earth is more than 6000 years old. So they lie through their teeth and invent stories to slam it; look at missing links, we have plently of fossils of primative man, but ask a Bible thumper and you get some sh*t about how they are all fake, based off 1 hoax, ever. I find it funny that they will lie and sin to protect their beliefs from something that doesn't in and of itself disprove them. And even if it did prove it wrong, wouldn't you want to know you were so wrong?
you remind me of this guy that stands around on my college campus and tells everyone passing by what horrible sinners they are and reads quotes from his king james bible really loud for hours on end... he compares a lot of things to hitler and makes poor arguments about links between them, it's actually quite entertaining to watch... he is more of an *ssh*l*e than you though, you seem quite nice
carbon dating is reliable to about 5000 years. It is used to date organic (once living) material. that is not how they determine the age of strata. They take measurements of deposits over time and extrapolate from there. You loose. Just say you have faith, because science does not agree with the bible, period. It is not possible for it to agree even in principle, since science is always changing, and religion is canon.
That really isn't how it works at all. Not even mentioning carbon isotope dating methods, the age of the rock layers can be determined in several ways by geologists. There would be no way to initially place a date on certain plants or animals and then assign the layers based on that! Where would all our numbers come from? Talk to a geologist about this.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link